Original source · versioned page text
NOOSAVILLE FORESHORE INFRASTRUCTURE MASTERPLAN (Referred from Services and Organisation Committee Meeting dated 10 June 2025 - Item 7.2) · Attachment 1 to the General Committee Minutes 16 June 2025 - DTMR Austroads Guide
Attachment 1 to the General Committee Minutes 16 June 2025 - DTMR Austroads Guide
Supplement to Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6A: Paths for Walking and Cycling
3 Path user considerations
3.2 Operating space
3.2.1 Pedestrians
Addition
Tactile Indicators
Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) are designed to give directional guidance and warning of
hazards to people with a vision impairment. They are detected through contact by foot or cane.
TGSI are manufactured out of synthetic rubber, ceramic and clay tiles and stamped concrete. Some
TGSI are suited to indoor and/or lightly trafficked areas rather than outdoor footpaths. The Compliant
Products Register for Tactile Ground Surface Indicators (TGSI) available on the Transport and Main
Roads website, lists products that meet the criteria required for outdoor use.
All TGSI must conform to Australian Standard AS 1428.4.1, also refer to Transport and Main Roads
Standard Drawings SD1446, SD1447, KRG1 and KRG2.
5 Design criteria
5.1 Width of paths
5.1.1 Clear width
Addition
Path capacity is only increased in 1 m width intervals, intermediate widths (for example 2.4 m or
3.7 m) are unlikely to improve capacity.
5.1.4 Shared paths
Difference
All of the text, including Table 5.3, in this section of Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6A is
replaced with the following:
In most circumstances, the minimum standard for new shared paths should be 3 m wide.
Park maintenance vehicles can typically operate on 2.5 m wide paths in dry conditions without causing
damage to the path. For this reason, 2.5 m should be the minimum standard for shared paths.
The design width of a path also depends on the number of pedestrians per hour, the number of
cyclists per hour and the design directional split. Table 6A-2 provides values for 90/10 directional split.
Table 6A-2 - Shared path capacity for different widths
Cyclists per hour
Pedestrians per hour
2.5 m path 3 m path 4 m path
0 730 1.380 2,420
20 440 1,160 2.200
50 210 960 1,990
Road Planning & Design Manual – Edition 2: Volume 3, Transport and Main Roads, November 2023 3
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 1 page
Page 2
Supplement to Austroads Guide to Road Design Part 6A: Paths for Walking and Cycling
Cyclists per hour
Pedestrians per hour
2.5 m path 3 m path 4 m path
100 – 770 1,740
200 – 460 1,440
Note: Based on two-way peak-hour volumes 90/10 directional split, design maximum of 12 delayed overtakings
per hour.
5.2 Bicycle operating speeds
Difference
Replace last sentence in this section with the following:
At locations where it is not appropriate to moderate bicycle speeds consideration should be given to
providing a separate pedestrian path.
Bicycle operation speeds may be estimated using the bicycle operation speed model, contact
[email protected] undertaken by Transport and Main Roads found no defensible justification for imposing
regulatory speed limits, and as a consequence would not use or recommend them as a safety device.
Alternative treatment methods may be as or more effective as a safety device, avoiding the negative
connotations associated with regulation. The Transport and Main Roads Guideline Speed
Management on Shared Paths concludes that the cycling community is able to self-moderate speeds
that are appropriate to the location without regulation.
The below Table 6A-3 replaces Appendix B, Table B1 in Austroads Guide to Road Design – Part 6A.
Table 6A-3 - Path speed-limiting devices
Queensland practice
Device Recommended Comments
additional comments
Speed Yes Can destabilise riders and increase Watts or sinusoidal
humps hazards if poorly sited or inadequately profile speed humps
marked. Use with care. Fit warning are acceptable
signage and path markings similar to
road speed humps
Path Yes Minimum one-way width 1.4 m. Only appropriate
narrowing Warning signage and adequate where narrowing is not
linemarking required expected to result in
path user conflict.
Path Yes Maximum deflection angle 10 degrees
deflection for high-speed path and 20 degrees
for low-speed path
Path No Can destabilise riders and increase
terminal hazards if used as speed limiting
deflection device. Used only to prevent
rails unauthorised vehicle entry
Rumble Yes Use as a warning device to alert riders Tactile (surface
strips to slow for changed conditions ahead change) is acceptable
Road Planning & Design Manual – Edition 2: Volume 3, Transport and Main Roads, November 2023 4